Mi i t off Human
Ministry
H
Resource
R
Development
D
l
t
Presentation on
Teacher Education and the
p
National Mission on Teachers and
Proposed
Teaching (NMTT)
1
Issues of Convergence in Teacher Education

Revision of B.Ed Curriculum by Universities
•
One of the key recommendations of the Justice Verma Commission
pertains to the re-designing of the current Teacher Education Programs,
in accordance with NCFTE, 2009.
•
As per information of NCTE, there are around 320 Universities in India
that offer Teacher Education courses and around 95 Universities have
revised
i d the
th B.Ed..
B Ed curriculum
i l
and
d 29 are in
i the
th process off revision.
i i
Information from rest of the Universities is awaited and UGC may furnish
updated information in this regard.
21 States
St t have
h
aligned
li
d their
th i D.El.Ed.
D El Ed program with
ith NCFTE,
NCFTE 2009.
2009
•
•
 Issues related to Affiliating norms.
 NAAC Accreditation.
• At present, the NAAC is continuing with the accreditation of Teacher
Education Institutions.
2
Issues of Convergence in Teacher Education
•
Need for Universities to Institute Teacher Learning Centres as part of all
Teacher Education Programmes.
Programmes
• Teacher Education(TE) should be made a part of Higher Education System
and duration of TE programmes may be enhanced:
 bringing Diploma programmes (2 year D.El.Ed after +2) within the University
system.
 commencement of longer duration integrated programmes and enhancing
duration of B.Ed/ M.Ed to 2 years would require collaboration between the
University system and the NCTE.
• The Institutional capacity should be increased for preparation of Teacher
Educators. Need to make the Masters in Education programme of 2-year
duration with the p
provision for specialization
p
in curriculum and p
pedagogic
g g
studies, foundation studies, management, policy and finance, and other
areas of emerging concerns in education.
 Continuous professional up-gradation
up gradation of teacher educators.
3
Proposed National Mission on Teachers and Teaching (NMTT) in XII Five Year
Plan
• A National Mission on Teachers and Teaching would be launched.
• Issues of teacher education are dealt holistically
• Recognise the central role of teachers in improving academic quality,
quality
• Sub-mission on higher education would pool all the ongoing initiatives
and new initiatives on faculty development under one umbrella for their
implementation and better monitoring
• Sub-mission on school sector would focus on expanding the capacity
for preparation of teacher educators by setting up 40 Schools of
Education in the university system
4
CABE Committee on NMTT
• The CABE Committee on National Mission on Teachers and Teaching under
the Chairmanship of Dr.
Dr Shashi Tharoor , then Minister of State,
State MHRD
submitted its Report giving recommendations on seven major thrust areas• Enhancing
E h
i the
th availability
il bilit off teachers;
t
h
• Ensuring continuing professional development opportunities;
• Development of guidelines/frameworks for the improvement of the existing
institutional structures and processes for professional development of
teachers;
• Formulating strategies for attracting and retaining talented youth into the
teaching profession; significantly raising the social and professional status of
teachers;
5
CABE Committee on NMTT
• Formulating
strategies
for
attracting
and
retaining
teachers from Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes,
OBCs and Minority communities;
• Formulating guidelines for recruitment of and provision of
necessary facilities for differently-abled teachers in
educational institutions to make education inclusive
across all levels; and
• Enhancing quality of teaching, teacher education and
teacher training and use of technology;
6
Existing Schemes and ongoing initiatives
•
Under Department of School Education and Literacy, the Centrally
Sponsored Scheme of Teacher Education Scheme revised for the XII Plan in
March, 2012 and approved outlay is Rs 6305.45 cr. for XII Plan - Centre
S
State
sharing
h i in
i the
h ratio
i off 75:25
75 25 (90:10
(90 10 for
f NER).
NER)
•
Under Department of Higher Education, several ongoing activities &
initiatives by :
– UGC, AICTE, IIM’s , TEQIP , Central Universities, NITTTR’s,
– NMEICT Mission,
– New
N
CSS off RUSA.
RUSA
•
There are also schemes /initiatives undertaken for human resource
development
under
Departments
of
Science
7
Information Technology.
and
Technology
and
Outcomes
• Create 40 Schools of Education;
• Create around 10,000 Ph.Ds;
• Create an additional mass of about one lakh school/college/university
teachers as the critical pool of human resources; sector –wise
wise and
discipline-wise by 2020; so as to improve the faculty-student ratios;
•
•
Within the one lakh ensure adequate numbers of SC, ST, OBC,
Minorities and Women are inducted;
Create a sufficient base of teacher educators and promote excellence in
f
faculty
lt for
f academic
d i leadership
l d hi positions;
iti
•
Create new institutional structures for specialized programmes and meet
th gaps in
the
i capacity
it building
b ildi
f
for
t
teaching
hi
l
learning
i
d
development,
l
t
curriculum , assessment , academic leadership, policy research and
specialized inter- university centres;
•
Create around 50 subject based networks
in different disciplines.
8
Strategies
g
Policy measures :
facilitate recruitment and appointment,
flexibility in engaging a variety of teachers,
inter alia, such as part-time, contractual,
adjunct, visiting etc., teaching
assistantships, faculty mobility ,
incentivisation ;
Programmatic and scheme based
interventions:
pre-service & in-service training
through existing and new institutional
structures, new academic programmes
& courses, strengthening post
postgraduate and doctoral programmes,
pre-scheduling year long training
calendars, online training;
Project based activities:
ICT based training, training of Maths, Science ,
Language teachers for schools, Core science &
engineering courses in technical education,
general courses in social science, humanities
and vocational courses
9
Integrated Model of Teacher Training
 RIE, Indian Institute of Teacher Education (IITE), and some State
Universities
offer
Four-year
integrated
course
on
teacher
education- B.Sc./BA + B.Ed.
 Each course has outlined Clear objectives with specific outcomes.
 Mode of transaction- Assignment, Project work, Face to face
interaction with counselor,
counselor Group discussion and Survey study and
List of Reference Books are also included.
10
Major Components
I. Institutional Oriented
• Creation of New Institutional Arrangements
(i)
Schools of Education (40 Nos.)
(ii) Centres of Excellence in Teaching and Learning Development
(55)
(iii) Inter-University Centres for Teacher Education
• Rejuvenating Existing Departments of Education in State Universities
II. Individual Oriented
(i)
Increasing number of teachers/faculty - Target 10,000 Ph.Ds
(ii) Innovations, Awards and Teaching Resource Grant/Support for
faculty
11
Major
j Components
p
III. Networks and Alliances
(i)
Subject Networks for Curricular Renewal and Reforms
((ii))
National Resource Centre for Education /Higher
g
Education
Academy
IV. Academic Leadership
(i)
Institutes of Academic Leadership (5 Nos.)
(ii)
Centres of Education Management ( 5 Zonal centres)
V. Policy Research
(i)
Centre for Policy Research
(ii) Research surveys and studies
(iii) Workshops
W k h
& Seminars
S i
12
Proposed
oposed Out
Outlay
ay
• It is a Central Sector Scheme,
Scheme fully funded by
the Government of India.
• In the Twelfth Five Year Plan,, NMTT has an
approved outlay of Rs.1700 crore
• In the Annual Plan 2014-15, an amount of
Rs.100 crore has been provided.
13
14
INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS OF NEW IIT IIIT NIT IIM SPA
IITs, IIITs, NITs, IIMs, SPA
Infrastructure Issues of IITs
IIT‐Indore :
•
The Govt.
Th
G t off M.P.
M P has
h allotted
ll tt d 501.42
501 42 acres off land
l d for
f permanentt campus, outt which
hi h 200
acre is yet to be officially handed over by the Forest Department to the Institute.
•
2.12 acres yet to be mutated in the name of IIT‐Indore.
•
96% boundary wall has been completed. The remaining could not be completed due to
resistance and threat from unduly persons assisted by local political elements.
•
Approval for Solid Waste Disposal is required from Indore Municipal Corporation.
•
Clearance from M.P. Pollution Control Board required.
IIT‐Mandi :
•
Better
B
tt and
d faster
f t road
d connectivity
ti it through
th
h Mandi‐Katindi‐Kamand
M di K ti di K
d link
li k road
d to
t the
th National
N ti
l
Highway NH21 & NH20 with alternate road route to Mandi through Uhl valley. The agencies,
Director (Technical Education), Forest Department (both at State & Center) have been
approached repeatedly to expedite the matter.
•
Delay in transfer of land allocated to the Institute resulting in wait for definition of
Institutional area and enabling rights needed to restrain trespassers.
IIT‐Bhubaneswar :
•
•
•
•
Private
P
i t land
l d acquisition
i iti off about
b t 21 acres under
d Jatni
J t i Tahasil
T h il covering
i Khudupur,
Kh d
K
Kansapada,
d
Podapada, Goradharmasagar and Arugul under Jatni Tahasil;
Dispute on lease of lands of about 2.80 acres and relocation of 15 houses constructed under
Indira Awas Yojana;
Identification of about 100 acres of land in Puri district for compensatory afforestation for
Forest Land Diversion
Finalization of regular lease in favour of the Institute for all the allotted land etc.
IIT‐Gandhinagar :
•
•
Institute has been given about 200 acres of land, of which a substantial part consists
deep ravines that can not be utilized for construction and this puts a severe limit of the
future expansion of the institute.
M
More
l d in
land
i the
h vicinity
i i i off the
h allotted
ll
d land
l d is
i critically
i i ll needed.
d d IIT‐GN
IIT GN is
i regularly
l l
pursuing with the Government of Gujarat for additional land.
Infrastructure Issues of IIITs
•
IIIT Kottayam, Kerala has finalized the land, but the land has not yet been handed over to the IIIT Kottayam Society due to delay in acquisition by more than a year. •
MoA of IIIT Tripura not signed as the bank guarantees have not come from the Industry Partner(s). •
Goa, Orissa, Punjab, Bihar, Chhattisgarh and J&K not able to get industry partners; these state have not forwarded their DPR
•
IIIT, Surat, Gujarat – Despite two reminders, clarification regarding Industry Partner(s) has not been received. •
IIIT Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh – The State Govt. has been requested to find another private Industry Partner alongside Madhya Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation for fruitful industry academia partnership.
•
Kerala, West Bengal, Haryana and Assam have demanded reservation for State students in the proposed IIIT in PPP mode. Infrastructure Issues of New NITs
During 2009 (XI plan), 10 new NITs have been established, 08 in Non‐NIT States and 02 in UTs of
Delhi and Puducherry. Land for permanent campuses was earmarked for all. However, the physical
transfer of land is yet to be done by the respective State Govts.



•
NIT ‐ Delhi : Government of Delhi already paid Rs.158 core to DDA for transfer of land
earmarked at Narela for p
permanent campus
p of NIT – Delhi. DDA now demanded Rs.18
crore towards interest due to belated payment of premium amount by the Delhi
Government.
NIT – Goa : Government of Goa was requested repeatedly for transfer of land earmarked at
Cuncolim. State Government off Goa not transferred
f
the land due to its constant demand off
exclusive 50% reservation for domicile of Goa State only.
NIT – Sikkim : Government of Sikkim was requested repeatedly for transfer of land
earmarked at Khamdong.
Khamdong The response of the State Government is still awaited.
awaited
The issue of transfer of land has repeatedly been taken up with the State Government at Chief
Secretary as well as Hon
Hon’ble
ble CM level.
level
In addition to the issue of transfer of land in NITs – Delhi, Goa and Sikkim, there are some other
issues in two NITs.

NIT – Arunachal Pradesh :
Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh is requested to provide smooth motorable road from Yupia
(temporary campus) to Jote.

NIT – Mizoram :
Govt of Mizoram is requested to provide road,
Govt.
road electricity and water connections at the
permanent campus located at Lengpui to further facilitate the construction activities.
Infrastructure Issues of IIMs
Infrastructure Issues of IIMs
IIMs (7 new IIMs)
IIM
IIM )
• Rohtak: Change of Land Use certificate issued on 09.06.2014. The institute is submitting the
Change of Land Use Certificate (CLU) to the SEIAA (the State Environment Impact Assessment
Authority) for environment clearance.
clearance
• Udaipur:
(i) The allotted land is under peripheral control belt as per master plan 2022 and to establish
institute in periphery control belt the NOC from High Court, Jodhpur is pending since 1
year.
(ii)State Government may intercede with UIT (Udaipur Improvement Trust) & Advocate
General of Rajasthan for NOC for IIM Udaipur similar to already provided to IIT Jodhpur.
• Ranchi: Land not allocated. Government of Jharkhand has approved 94.36 Acre. 4.22 acre
of Raiyati land still to be acquired
Infrastructure
f
I
Issues of SPA ‐
f SPA VIJAYAWADA
SSchool
h l off Planning
Pl
i and
d Architecture
A hi
– Vijayawada
Vij
d (SPAV) was established
bli h d on 07.07.2008
07 07 2008 by
b the
h
Ministry of HRD.
Land Transfer Issue
So far, land measuring 9.66 acres only has been transferred by the State Government against the
projected land of 63.23 acres offered, initially.
Solution
Transfer of additional land measuring 73.29 acres identified near Gannavaram Airport, Vijayawada.
Status
A request has been made to the Government of Andhra Pradesh to expedite the proposal to allot 73
acres.
acres
J
June
17
17, 2014
9
TEQIP (PHASE­
TEQIP (PHASE
Q (
­II))
• “Centrally Sponsored Scheme” (CSS), aided by the World Bank
• 190 competitively selected engineering institutions are participating
• Duration of the Project : 4 years (Aug. 2010 – Dec 2014)
• Project Objectives:
o To strengthen the Institutions to produce high quality engineers for better
employability;
o To scale‐up postgraduate education and demand‐driven Research &
Development and Innovation;
o To establish Centers of Excellence for focused applicable research;
o To train faculty for effective Teaching; and
o To
oe
enhance
a ce Institutional
s u o a aand
d Sys
System
e Management
a age e e
effectiveness.
ec e ess
10
 Funding:
o Total Outlay of the Project
:
Rs. 2430 Crore
o Project cost borne by MHRD and States
 Govt./Govt. aided Institutions
 Private unaided institutions
:
:
75:25 - Regular States
:
90:10 – Special Category States
60:20:20 (institutions share)
 Budget Allocation for the year 2013
2013-14
14 : Rs
Rs. 400 Crore
 Fund released : Rs 399.71 Crore
 Budget Allocation for the year 2014-15
2014 15 : Rs
Rs. 450 Crore
 Fund released : Rs. 86.40 Crore
 Fund in Pipeline : Rs 41.58 Crore
11
PROJECT INSTITUTIONS :
State participating in the project :
22
Total No. of Institutions selected :
190
Sub component 1 1 Sub­component 1.1 113
:
CFIs : 8
G
Govt. /Govt. aided /G
id d
: 82
82
Private unaided : 23
Strengthening Institutions to i
improve learning outcomes and l
i
t
d
employability of graduates
Sub­component 1.2
Sub
component 1.2
Scaling‐up Post Graduate education and demand driven R&D&I
and demand driven R&D&I
:
77
CFIs : 17
Govt. /Govt. aided : 46 Private unaided : 14
12
TEQIP‐II
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT INDICATORS FOR 3RD JOINT REVIEW MISSION BY THE WORLD BANK & GOVERNMENT OF INDIA HELD FROM 28TH APRIL TO 2ND MAY 2014
1.
2.
3.
Autonomy (obtained or applied for)
Board of Governors (BoG) in existence
Minutes of Meeting of BoG published on institution's website
4.
Governance Self Review done – it consists of a questionnaire to be filled by BoG
5.
5
6.
7.
about the contribution made by the BoG in the last year and the suggestions to make it
more effective in the year ahead
NBA accreditation
NBA dit ti
Statutory audit completed – audit done by chartered accountant about the
financial transactions
1st round of Performance Audit & Data Audit completed
p
– audit off
academic performance and related data by an academician
8. MIS data entry consistent for 4 years – complete entry of data on institutions,
students, faculty , staff, infrastructure etc consistently for 2010­11, 2011­12, 2012­13 and
2013­14
9. Actual expenditure (60% of 1st instalment) – Institutions should have utilized 60% of the funds released in 1st instalment
10. Committed expenditure (100% of total funds received)– Institutions should
h
have
commitment
i
f the
for
h utilization
ili i off the
h totall funds
f d received
i d by
b having
h i action
i plan
l
duly approved by the BoG
13
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
S.
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Name of State
Gujarat
Himachal Pradesh
Himachal Pradesh
Jharkhand
Karnataka
Kerala
Maharashtra
Tamil Nadu
Tamil Nadu
UT‐Chandigarh
UT‐Puducherry
Uttar Pradesh
11 Uttarakhand
No. of Institutions
No. of Institutions meeting 8 out of 10 indicators
% of fulfillment
7
1
2
19
19
17
9
3
1
7
3
7
1
2
19
19
17
9
3
1
7
3
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
14
Contd….
No. of N
f Institutions
No. of Institutions meeting 8 out of 10 indicators
% fulfillment
12 Andhra Pradesh 24
22
91.6
13 Madhya Pradesh
5
4
80
14 Punjab
8
6
75
15 Rajasthan
9
4
44.4
16 Odisha
2
1
50
17 West Bengal
15
14
93.3
18 Haryana
6
5
83.3
19
20
21
22
2
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S.
S
No.
Name of State
Bihar
Bih
Chhattisgarh
NCT‐Delhi
Tripura
15
Details of the institutions which could not fulfill the following indicators

University College of Engineering, Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, Andhra Pradesh
o
o
o
o
o

JNTU Institute of Science & Technology, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh
o
o
o
o

Not published Minutes of Meeting of BoG
Not
published Minutes of Meeting of BoG on institution
on institution’ss website
website
Not applied for NBA accreditation
Not conducted academic performance auditing
Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
College of Agriculture Engineering and Technology, Punjab Agriculture University, College
of Agriculture Engineering and Technology Punjab Agriculture University
Ludhiana, Punjab
o
o
o
o

Not submitted Governance self review
Not applied for NBA accreditation
Not applied for NBA accreditation
Not conducted academic performance auditing
Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Shri GS Institute of Technology & Science, Indore, Madhya Pradesh
o
o
o
o

Have not applied for autonomous institution status
Not submitted Governance self review
Not applied for NBA accreditation
Not conducted academic performance auditing
Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Not submitted Governance self review
Not applied for NBA accreditation
Not conducted academic performance auditing
Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab
o
o
o
o
Not submitted Governance self review
Not
submitted Governance self review
Not applied for NBA accreditation
Not conducted academic performance auditing
Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
16





M L V Textile & Engineering College, Bhilwara, Rajasthan o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1
Not have 60% expenditure of 1st installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014 College of Technology and Engineering, Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur, Rajasthan o Not applied for NBA accreditation
Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not completed statutory audit
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1st installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
Govt Engineering College, Ajmer, Rajasthan o Not completed statutory audit
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1st installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
Government Women Engineering College, Ajmer, Rajasthan o Not applied for autonomous institution status
o Not completed statutory audit
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Government Engineering College, Jhalawar, Rajasthan
o Not applied for autonomous institution status
Not applied for autonomous institution status
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not completed statutory audit
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1st installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
17





Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology, Burla, Sambalpur, Odisha
o Not published minutes of meeting on institution
Not published minutes of meeting on institution’ss website
website
o Not submitted governance self review
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
Govt College of Engineering and Textile & Technology, Berhampore, West Bengal o Not applied for autonomous institution status
Not applied for autonomous institution status
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years Faculty of Engineering & Technology, Deenbandhu
Chhotu Ram University of Science & Technology, Murthal, Sonipat, Haryana
o Not submitted governance self review
Not submitted governance self review
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Bhagalpur College of Engineering, Bhagalpur, Bihar
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o app ed o
acc ed a o
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1st installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
p
g
Muzaffarpur Institute of Technology, Muzaffarpur, Bihar
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
y
y
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1st installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
Government Engineering College, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
pp
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1st installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014 18





Rungta
g College of Engineering & Technology, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh
g
g
g
gy,
,
g
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Government Engineering College, Jagdalpur, Bastar, Chhatishgarh
g
g
g , g p ,
,
g
o Not applied for autonomous institution status
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Government Engineering College, Raipur, Chhatisgarh
g
g
g ,
p ,
g
o Not applied for autonomous institution status
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
Delhi Technological University, Delhi g
y
o Not published minutes of meeting on institution’s website
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not entered MIS data consistently for 4 years
y
y
st
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1 installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
Tripura Institute of Technology, Narsingarh, Tripura
o Not applied for autonomous institution status
o Not applied for NBA accreditation
o Not conducted academic performance auditing
o Not have 60% expenditure of 1st installment
o Not committed expenditure against total funds received till March 2014
19
Issues with States

Quality Initiatives
o Quality Circles” have been initiated in IITs (Kanpur, Hyderabad, Madras,
Bombay, Delhi, Kharagpur & Gandhinagar) by
b establishing
t bli hi
K
Knowledge
l d
Incubation Centre (KIT) for Project institutions.
 550 faculty members have been trained
o Direct to Student programme in 73 project institutions under
Quality Enhancement in Engineering Education (QEEE) programme
 Top quality content and pedagogical resources provided to the students
through technology
o Capacity Development Programmes with IIMs  IIMs
IIMs (Indore, Lucknow, Bangalore Kozhikode & Trichy
(Indore Lucknow Bangalore Kozhikode & Trichy are conducting
Training programmes
 640 senior faculty members /administrators benefitted.  IIM Udaipur & Raipur planning to conduct such programmes

Issues:
o
o
o
Implementation of trainings received should be ensured in respective institutions
States may nominate more faculty members for the training by IITs and IIMs
More institutions should participate in QEEE
20
o Faculty position
 66% regular faculty available vis-à-vis sanctioned posts
 States having < 50% filled post are Bihar (19%), Chhattisgarh (34%), Gujarat
(47%), Himachal Pradesh (22%), Odisha (47%) and Uttarakhand (42%)
 Financial Issues
o Funds
F d released
l
db
by MHRD b
butt nott released
l
db
by th
the St
States
t tto IInstitutions
tit ti
S.No. 1
2
3
4
5
6
Date of Release by MHRD 11.07.2012
11.02.2014
27.02.2014
28.02.2013
16.08.2013
26.09.2013
04.11.2013
11.02.2014
Rajasthan 27.02.2014
Uttar Pradesh 11.02.2014
Grand Total
Name of the State Chhattisgarh
Karnataka Odisha
Punjab Amount
((in Cr.))
0.24
2.63
3.00
4.59
2.50
10.18
1.50
1.12
1.50
2.25
Total amount (in Cr.))
0.24
2.63
3.00
19.89
1.50
2.25
29.51
21
THANKS
MANDATORY
ACCREDITATION
[Meeting of Secretaries of Higher and Technical
Education of States & UTs with Hon’ble HRM]
Vigyan Bhawan
17th June, 2014
Accreditation – Ideal architecture
Regulator
Promoter
Accreditor
/Assessor
Architecture of
Accreditation
Assessment
and
Accreditation Agency Regulator
Institutions
NAAC
NBA
National
Accreditation
Board
State
Assessment &
Accreditation
Agency
Assessment
Before
commencement of
academic
operations
Accreditation
After passing out of
two batches or six
years in existence,
whichever is earlier
 Mandatory assessment and accreditation. Applies to all
- Central Universities
- State Universities (including State Private
Universities)
- Deemed to be Universities
- all Colleges, including autonomous colleges
 Assessment
and Accreditation will be pre-requisites for
recognition by the UGC.
 The accreditation will be valid for a period of five years
Present
status
Universities
accredited by
NAAC
State/Union Territory
Nos. State/Union Territory
Nos.
Andhra Pradesh
18
Manipur
01
Arunachal Pradesh
01
Meghalaya
01
Assam
04
Mizoram
01
Bihar
03
Nagaland
01
Chhattisgarh
02
New Delhi
07
Goa
01
Orissa
06
Gujarat
09
Pondicherry
01
Haryana
03
Punjab
05
Himachal Pradesh
02
Rajasthan
09
Jammu and Kashmir
02
Tamil Nadu
27
Jharkhand
01
Tripura
01
Karnataka
14
Uttaranchal
05
Kerala
Maharashtra
05
Uttar Pradesh
17
23
West Bengal
07
Madhya Pradesh
08
Present
status
Colleges
accredited by
NAAC
State/Union Territory
Nos. State/Union Territory
Andhra Pradesh
337
Nos.
Manipur
14
Meghalaya
11
194
Mizoram
19
Bihar
49
Nagaland
09
Chhattisgarh
47
New Delhi
14
Goa
20
Odisha
Daman
01
Puducherry
Gujarat
412
Punjab
213
Haryana
278
Rajasthan
190
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
06
210
13
Himachal Pradesh
40
Sikkim
Jammu and Kashmir
60
Tamil Nadu
Jharkhand
23
Tripura
Karnataka
561
Uttar Pradesh
Kerala
191
Uttarakhand
50
Madhya Pradesh
160
West Bengal
275
Maharashtra
1067
02
529
05
448
State/Union Territory Nos.
State wise
details of
Andaman & Nicobar
Island
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
01 Maharashtra
235 Madhya Pradesh
05 Maharashtra
Nos.
238
362
560
Assam
106 Manipur
41
Bihar
365 Meghalaya
08
Chandigarh
Chhattisgarh
applications
received by
NAAC since
Jan.,2013
State/Union Territory
17 Mizoram
16
222 Nagaland
18
Odisha
185
Daman & Diu
01 Puducherry
17
Delhi
69 Punjab
182
Goa
15 Rajasthan
245
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
0
Gujarat
241 Sikkim
Haryana
176 Tamil Nadu
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu and Kashmir
Jharkhand
45 Tripura
111 Uttarakhand
32 Uttar Pradesh
Karnataka
376 West Bengal
Kerala
109
02
353
18
37
336
164
State/Union Territory
State wise
details of
Andaman & Nicobar
Island
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Chhattisgarh
Institutions
accredited by
NBA
Nos. State/Union Territory Nos.
01 Jharkhand
08
176 Karnataka
167
0 Kerala
01 Maharashtra
0 Madhya Pradesh
06 Odisha
27
367
67
33
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
0 Puducherry
04
Daman & Diu
0 Punjab/Chandigarh
41
Delhi
21 Rajasthan
27
Goa
05 Tamil Nadu
Gujarat
76 Tripura
04
Haryana
35 Uttrakhand
07
Himachal Pradesh
07 Uttar Pradesh
Jammu and Kashmir
03 West Bengal
219
100
38
Importance of accreditation
UGC/RUSA
funding
UGC 2(f) &
12B
recognition
Assessment and
Accreditation
Penalties
Repeal of
recognition
under 12 B
Revoking
Deemed to
University
status
Proceeding
against the
Private
University
Withholding
all grants
from
UGC/AICTE/
RUSA
Role of State Governments
1
• monitor the State Higher Educational Institutions to
undergo assessment and mandatory accreditation
2
• adopt mandatory accreditation as one of the norms
for deciding state funding / intervention
3
• explore formation of credible Assessment and
Accreditation Agencies.
Recognition of Assessment and
Accreditation Agencies

The Central Government has accorded
approval to the UGC(Recognition and
Monitoring
of
Assessment
and
Accreditation
Agencies)
Regulations,
2014
to regulate the work of
Assessment and Accreditation Agencies
by the UGC.

The UGC is undertaking consequential
action
for
notification
of
these
regulations. Detailed requirements for
Assessment and Accreditation Agencies
(including
State
Quality
Assurance
Bodies) are being worked out by UGC.
Desirable attributes of a State Assessment
and Accreditation Agency

Registered as non profit entity in respective State.

Academically and financially an autonomous body.

Follow the methodology, criteria and procedure developed
by NAAC and NBA. Have Executive Committee(EC) with
Director and support Staff.

Members of the EC to include 5 academicians within the
state and 5 outside the state.

EC should have nominees of NAAC and UGC as ex-officio
members

Appellate body should be defined.

Adequate office space and training infrastructure.
Road ahead
State
Assessment
Reintroduction
of NARAHEI Bill and
Accreditation
and
formation
of
Creation of
Agencies with
NARA
Assessment and
support from
Accreditation
RUSA
Agencies by all
Enhancement
of capacity of sector
NAAC and NBA regulators
Thanks
Praveen Prakash
JS(TEL) & Mission Director
26,000 Colleges / Universities / Research Labs connected
In next 3 years.
years 250 thousand schools will be given Broad Band
*In
Connectivity (Project Cost: $4 Billion)
A View
1st Quad
2nd Quad
e-Content
PDF / e-Books / illustration , video
demonstrations / documents & Interactive
simulations wherever required
3rd Quad
e-Tutorial
Video and Audio Content in an organised
form, Animation, Simulations, Virtual Labs
4th Quad
Web Resources
Related Links, Wikipedia Development of Course,
Open Content on Internet, Case Studies,
Anecdotal information, Historical development of
the subject, Articles
Self Assessment
MCQ, Problems, Quizzes, Assignments &
solutions, Online feedback through
discussion forums & setting up the FAQ ,
Clarifications on general misconceptions
UG Courses
English Language (General)
Mathematics
Botany
Environmental Science
Photography (Vocational Course)
Anthropology
History
Hindi
PG Courses
NPTEL
Virtual Labs
Scilab
Licensing policy of created e-contents
CC-BY-SA
*Commercial usage permitted
N-LIST
A View Training
Shodhganga
CONDUCTION
OF
DISSEMINATION &
AWARENESS
WORKSHOPS

The Sub-Mission
Th
S b Mi i
on Polytechnics,
P l
h i
i
inter-alia,
li
has the following components:
• SETTING UP OF NEW POLYTECHNICS
• STRENGTHENING OF EXISTING
POLYTECHNICS
• CONSTRUCTION OF WOMEN’S
HOSTELS IN POLYTECHNICS



300 Polytechnics planned @ Rs. 12.30 crore
per polytechnic.
291 polytechnics approved, total sanction of
Rs. 2113.69 crore till 31.03.2014.
61
Polytechnics
have
since
been
operationalised till 31.3.2014.
Contd
Contd…..
Contd…..

Top 3 performing states (in terms of
Operationalization)
p
(Rs. in crores)
State
Polytechnic
SanctioSanctio
ned
Operation‐
O
i
alized
Amount Amount
approved released
Tamil Nadu 7
7
86.10
86.10
Punjab
7
7
86.10
70.00
J&K
18
18
221 40
221.40
160 48
160.48



To upgrade infrastructure facilities of existing
Government Polytechnics.
Financial assistance – Rs. 754.00 crores
approved to 500 polytechnics @ maximum of
Rs. 2.00 crore per polytechnic.
Financial assistance of Rs.454.70 crore has
been released till 31.03.2014.
Contd…..

Contd…..
Top 3 performing states (in terms of grant
utilization )
(Rs. in crores)
State
Polytechnics
identified
Amount Amount
approved released
Uttar Pradesh
57
70.92
51.40
Kerala
48
79 28
79.28
59 70
59.70
Gujarat
19
37.25
27.90




To enhance women enrolment in polytechnic
education
through
one-time
financial
assistance
i t
@ maximum
i
R 1 00 crore per
Rs.1.00
polytechnic,
to be provided to 500 existing AICTE
approved Government / Government aided
Polytechnics
496 Polytechnics
P l
h i
h
have
b
been
provided
id d
assistance of Rs.343.30 crore till 31.03.2014
women’s
114
women
s
hostels
have
been
operationalized
Contd….
Contd….

Top 3 performing states (in terms of
operationalsation)
(Rs. in crores)
Hostels
State
Amount Amount
approved released
approved operationalised
Rajasthan
j
26
15
26.00
22.30
Karnataka
57
20
57.00
43.60
K
Kerala
l
41
15
41 00
41.00
27 80
27.80
COMMUNITY COLLEGE
SCHEME





CCs will
CC
ill provide
id modular
d l credit-based
di b
d courses with
i h entry and
d
exit flexibility that conforms to the National Skills Qualification
Framework (NSQF)/NVEQF/National occupational standards(NOS).
CCs will offer programmes leading to certificate, diploma,
advance diploma or associate degrees with options to transfer to
regular degree programmes.
The curricula will include an appropriate mix of academic and
vocational skills.
The assessment of vocational skills and training provided by
Community Colleges will be done by Skill Knowledge Providers
(SKP) in accordance with guidelines developed by respective
sector skill councils.
Ce t cat o
Certification
to be do
done
e by
Universities for vertical mobility.
State
Technical
ec
ca
Boards
oa ds
and
a
d
UGC
AICTE
No.
of
Polyt
echn
ics
appr
oved
No.
of
Coll
eges
g
appr
oved
No. of
Colleges
received
funds
No. of
College
s
Started
the
Scheme
Total
funds
release
d(Rs.
in
lakhs)
Intake
capacit
y
create
d
98
34
24
741.
741
00
4135 96
Total CCs approved: 194
Total funds released: 4332.00 lakhs
No. of
Polyte
chnics
receiv
ed
funds
No.
Polyt
echni
cs
Start
ed
the
Sche
me
Total
funds
released
(Rs. in
lakhs)
Intake
capacit
y
created
72
26
3591.
3591
00
12,30
12
30
0
States/UTs performance


Good performer: Bihar,
Bihar Andhra Pradesh &
Maharashtra
Slow
performer:
pradesh & Kerala
Uttarakhand,
Madhya
WELCOME
SCHEMES UNDER DIRECT BENEFIT
TRANSFER
1
DIRECT BENEFITS TRANSFER (DBT)
•
Direct Benefits Transfer (DBT) programme was launched
on 1st January 2013.
•
Credits the amount directlyy to Bank Accounts of the
Beneficiaries.
•
Ensures that benefits go to individuals
individuals’ bank accounts
electronically.
•
Speeds up payments,
payments removes leakages,
leakages curbs pilferage and
duplication.
•
Mi i i
Minimizes
Ch
Channel
l off funds
f d flow.
fl
•
It enables monitoring of funds flow and implementation.
2
SCHEMES UNDER DBT
S h
Scheme
 Scholarship to Universities /
College students
 Fellowship schemes of
University Grant Commission
(UGC)
 Fellowship schemes of All
India Council for Technical
Education (AICTE)
Total
1,21,657
Amountt
A
(Rs. In
crores))
140.53
29,115
239.24
29,000
113.00
1,79,772
492.77
No. off
N
Beneficiaries
3
SCHOLARSHIP FOR COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY
STUDENTS

Financial assistance is provided to meritorious students who are
above 80 percentile of successful candidates in the relevant stream
for a particular Board of Examination, in class Xll and,

pursuing regular courses and having family income of less than Rs
6 lakh per annum.

82000 fresh scholarships per annum (41000 for boys and 41000 for
girls).

Rs. 1000/- per month for the first three years of college and
university
i
it courses.
4
CONTD.
 Rs. 2000/- per month in the 4th and 5th year for PG and
Professional course .

Scholarships paid for 10 months in an academic year.

Scholarships has been divided amongst the State Boards /CBSE /
ICSE
5
UGC Schemes
S h
U
Under
d DBT
S.No.
Name of Schemes/ Ministry
No. of
Beneficiaries
Grant
released
From
01.01.2013 to
23.05.2014
[Rs. In crores )
Rajiv Gandhi National Fellowship for SC
Candidates
- (Ministry of Social Justice &
Empowerment) – for SC Candidates who wish to
pursue higher studies.
3998
99.46
2
Rajiv Gandhi National Fellowship for ST
Candidates – (Ministry of Tribal Affairs) – for ST
Candidates to pursue higher studies.
1333
31.19
3
Maulana Azad National Fellowship for Minority
Students- (Ministry of Minority Affairs) - for
unemployed students from minority communities
f pursuing
for
i regular
l andd full-time
f ll i M. Phil
hil andd Ph.D.
h
3019
61.30
1
6
Name of Schemes funded by Ministry
Of Human
H
Resource
R
Development
D l
t
P.G.
P
G Scholarship
S h l hi for
f
P f i
Professional
l Courses
C
f
for
SC/ST Candidates- to provide opportunities to
SC/ST candidate to undertake post-graduate level
studies in professional subjects like engineering,
engineering
management, pharmacy etc.
Postt Doctoral
P
D t l Fellowship
F ll
hi for
f SC/ST Candidates
C did t
for SC/ST candidates for pursuing PG level studies
in
professional
subjects
like
engineering,
management pharmacy etc.
management,
etc
No. of
B fi i i
Beneficiaries
Grant
released
l
d
From
01.01.2013
to
23.05.2014
(Rs. in crores)
2241
6.01
267
7.81
7
P.G. Indira Gandhi Scholarship for Single Girl Child- The scheme is open
p to anyy single
g ggirl child of her pparents,, for
admission to Post Graduate in non professional courses.
7850
9.54
P.G. Scholarship for University Rank Holders –To first
and second rank holder at UG level and admitted in any post
graduate course and subject to a minimum of 60% marks at
undergraduate level in selected streams.
1878
2.77
Dr. D.S. Kothari Post-Doctoral Fellowship in Sciences – To
encourage research work by young researchers who have
received their PhD degree
g or have submitted their PhD thesis.
218
3.41
8
UGC-National Eligibility Test – JRF - To provide
opportunities to NET qualified candidates to undertake
advanced studies and research leading to M. Phil/PhD in
humanities and social sciences including Languages and
Sciences.
7779
13.78
Emeritus Fellowship – To provide superannuated teachers to
pursue active research in their respective field of specialisation.
230
2.53
Post-Doctoral Fellowship for Women - To women candidates
holding PhD degree and take up advance studies and research
in Science, Engineering, Technology, Humanities and Social
Sciences.
304
1 44
1.44
TOTAL
29115
239.24
9
DBT SCHEME UNDER AICTE
•
AICTE is implementing ‘PG Scholarship Scheme’ for engineering students
who have qualified GATE.
•
Applicants have to get themselves registered through AICTE portal.
•
There are 29000 beneficiaries. The total amount transferred to beneficiaries
during the period 1.01.2013 to 31.03.2014 is Rs.113 crores (apprx).
10
Issues

Wide gap between the allotted Quota earmarked to each State versus
actual utilization (Annexure III).

Onlyy 43458 scholarships
p were disbursed of the total qquota of 82000 fresh
scholarship during 2013-14.

List of eligible students for the Academic year 2013-14 not received from
States viz.

Bihar,

Jharkhand,

Mizoram,

Nagaland,

Rajasthan

K
Karnataka
k

West Bengal
11
ISSUES CONTD.

Renewal process needs to be expedited by the Boards

Preparatory work for 2014-15 scholarships need to be completed in
time.
i

Utilization Certificates to be sent by State Education Boards.
12
Request to the States

Need to be proactive

T take
To
t k up wide
id publicity
bli it about
b t the
th schemes
h

Strengthening of the state machinery to handle the schemes
effectively

Concerted efforts for full utilization of their quota

Expedite response on proposed modification on reservation quota.

Monitor and supervise the schemes

Suggest measures to improve the reach of the scheme.
13
THANK YOU
14
ALL INDIA SURVEY ON
HIGHER EDUCATION
(AISHE)
(
)
17.06.2014
1
AISHE
First Web based portal was started in First
Web based portal was started in
2011 for 2010‐11.
 Data is directly collected from the st tut o s o g e educat o
institutions of higher education
 Nodal officers of the institutions are ibl f
ll ti
d l di
responsible for collecting and uploading the data in prescribed formats.
 Static reports are automatically generated using the data uploaded.
generated using the data uploaded.

2
AISHE





AISHE 2010‐11 completed and final report is
available
il bl on the
th webpage
b
off the
th Ministry.
Mi i t
AISHE is also 2011‐12 completed and provisional
report is
i available.
il bl Final
Fi l report will
ill be
b available
il bl
within two months.
D
Data
uploading
l di
f
for
AISHE 2012‐13
2012 13 is
i under
d
progress and is expected to be completed by
September 2014.
2014
September,
A scheme HEPSIS at an estimated cost of Rs.99
crore has
h
b
been
approved
d for
f
i l
implementation
t ti
during the 12 Five Year Plan. AISHE is part of this
scheme.
scheme
AISHE 2013‐14 will be started w.e.f. 17th June 2014 3
RESPONSE DURING AISHE 20112011-12
University
Colleges
Stand Alone
Total Forms
Expected
642
35232
11489
Forms uploaded
610
21277
5513
Form
Uploaded
95%
60.4
48%
4
Progress-- AISHE 2012
Progress
2012--13
State ‐ wise Progress of the Survey 2012‐13
16‐Jun‐2014
University
State
Total
College
Form Uploaded
% Completion
Total
Andaman & Nicobar Islands
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Stand Alone
Form Uploaded
% Completion
Total
Form Uploaded
6
3
50
4
47
23
49
4809
1638
34
1132
3
2
67
26
11
42
11
% Completion
237
21
25
Assam
9
8
89
488
165
34
91
23
Bihar
20
17
85
657
258
39
74
21
28
Chandigarh
3
1
33
27
21
78
5
2
40
Chhatisgarh
19
13
68
587
536
91
71
34
48
5
5
100
1
42
32
Dadra & Nagar Ha eli
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
Daman & Diu
Delhi
3
3
100
4
50
188
75
40
130
100
53
47
89
10
39
98
1947
1817
93
484
195
40
20
80
1075
332
31
326
62
19
26
13
2
2
Gujarat
40
Haryana
25
Goa
Himachal Pradesh
18
11
61
304
129
42
75
21
28
Jammu and Kashmir
11
2
18
309
115
37
46
2
4
Jharkhand
12
7
58
240
38
16
56
Karnataka
45
44
98
3287
2925
89
2031
1294
64
Kerala
17
9
53
1070
551
51
594
294
49
Madhya Pradesh
36
26
72
2280
1205
53
390
7
2
Maharashtra
45
26
58
4814
1880
39
2523
676
27
Manipur
Meghalaya
Mizoram
Nagaland
Odisha
Puducherry
3
2
67
85
54
64
17
10
5
50
61
22
36
21
3
14
3
3
100
29
29
100
9
9
100
61
45
74
9
19
10
53
1108
233
21
254
77
30
4
4
100
90
24
27
56
6
11
20
4
Punjab
19
9
47
991
133
13
311
62
Rajasthan
45
24
53
2719
840
31
552
46
8
6
4
67
20
16
80
5
2
40
60
50
83
2492
2370
95
1154
1134
98
3
3
100
50
48
96
12
7
58
Uttar Pradesh
59
37
63
5043
1754
35
701
83
12
Uttrakhand
20
17
85
399
176
44
100
70
70
26
24
92
837
772
92
245
167
68
659
455
69
36160
18270
51
11504
4576
40
Sikkim
Tamil Nadu
Tripura
West Bengal
West Bengal
All India
5
Key
y Findings
g - AISHE 2011
2011--12
• Total enrolment 2.86 crore ( Male 1.59 crore
& Female - 1.27 crore
• GER 20.4,, Male – 21.6 , Female – 18.9
• Distance enrolment constitute 12.5% of the
total enrolment
• Foreign students enrolled – 31,632
Highest
share from neighboring
g
g
g countries
– Nepal (17%), Bhutan (7%)
• College
g density
y ((No. of colleges
g p
per lakh
eligible population (18-23 years) – 25
 Varies from 6 in Bihar to 64 in Puducherry.
y
6
Support from States/UTs expected
• Setting
g up
p of AISHE Unit at State level.
• States/UTs to ensure submission of
mandate
d t form
f
f release
for
l
off funds
f d to
t AISHE
UNITS.
• Effective coordination with all Institutions
in the State in g
getting
g the data uploaded
on the portal.
• All the
th nodal
d l officers
ffi
off the
th institutions
i tit ti
t
to
ensure uploading of their accounts details
on the AISHE portal for release of
remuneration.
7
Thank You
8
Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan
17th June, 2014
June 2014
Institutional Density by State
y y
2
GER of States
Puducherry
Lakshwadweep
Delhi
Daman and Diu
Dadar and Nagar Haveli
Chandigarh
Andaman and Nicobar Islands
West Bengal
Uttarakhand
Uttar Pradesh
Tripura
Tamil Nadu
Sikkim
Rajasthan
Punjab
Odisha
Nagaland
Mizoram
Meghalaya
Manipur
Maharashtra
Madhya Pradesh
Madhya Pradesh
Kerala
Karnataka
Jharkhand
Jammu and Kashmir
Himachal Pradesh
Haryana
Gujarat
Goa
Chhattisgarh
Bihar
Assam
Arunachal Pradesh
Andhra Pradesh
0.0
29.1
5.3
47.9
2.3
4.4
28.0
26.2
11.9
36.0
10.9
11 4
11.4
19.0
24.8
9.6
10.8
11.3
16.1
26.5
15.4
14.8
21.4
14.9
14
9
13.1
18.1
9.4
18.2
23.9
19.1
15.9
28.3
20.0
11.0
90
9.0
15.0
16.9
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
3
45.0
50.0
HE Expenditure as % of GSDP
HE Expenditure as % of GSDP
4
[1]
Refer to Annexure I: States at a Glance
Share of Centre and State Expenditure
Share of Centre and State Expenditure 5
Faculty quality and availability
yq
y
y
Faculty Shortage in %
40
40
40
35
Argentina
35
30
Student ‐ Teacher Ratio in selected Countries
l
dC
i
16.3
B il
Brazil
25
22.2
Canada
17.4
25
China
16.8
20
India
15
Russian Federation
10
Sweden
5
United Kingdom
0
United
United States
States
24
18.1
9.5
18
13
13.6
6
0
10
20
30
Student Student ‐ Teacher Ratio
Teacher Ratio
6
Student per capita expenditure
Student per capita expenditure P C it E
Per Capita Expenditure on Higher Education (18‐23 years)
dit
Hi h Ed ti (18 23
)
GER
60
16,000
14,646
• Per capita expenditure for Central Educational 13,104 Institutions (IIT, NIT, IIIT, IIM, IISER,CU) – Rs. 1.25 lakhs
50
14,000
12,000
40
10,000
30
8,000
6,848
6,640
5,893
5,498
20
4,479
3,693
2,941
10
3,7563,843
4,471
2,464
,
1,091
1,409
6,000
6
4,675
3,9553,782
2,958
2,419
1,6211,679
2,659
1,623
3,237 4,000
2,732
1,221
522
1,676
2,000
426
0
0
7
8
Collleges und
der 2f & 12B
J&K
07
Punjab 109
HP
21
Haryana 167
Enggineering & Techniccal Institutes
Uttarakhand 35
Delhi 21
Ar. P
01
Sikkim
01
U.P.
319
Rajasthan
133
Gujarat
104
Bihar22
M.P.
227
Manipur
01
W.B
88
Odisha
Meghalaya Maharashtra
Diu Daman
102
01
357
Dadar & Telangana
Jharakhand
Nagar Haveli
&
16
Goa
Andhra Pradesh
04
713
Karnataka
191
Kerala
151
T.N.
499
01
0 ‐10
11 50
11 ‐50
51 ‐ 100
101 ‐ 200
101 201>
9
10
SKEEWED DISSTRIBUTIO
ON OF HEIs
11
SKEEWED DISSTRIBUTIO
ON OF HEIs
Objectives
• Improve the overall quality of the existing state institutions ‐ conformity to prescribed norms and standards and accreditation as a mandatory quality ib d
d t d d
d
dit ti
d t
lit
assurance framework. • Usher transformative reforms ‐ facilitating institutional structure for planning and monitoring at the state level, promoting autonomy and improving governance in institutions
• Ensure academic and examination and affiliation reforms in the higher education institutions. • Ensure adequate availability of quality faculty • Expand the institutional base by creating additional capacity in existing Expand the institutional base by creating additional capacity in existing
institutions and establish new institutions
• Correct regional imbalances in access to higher education ‐ facilitating access to high quality institutions in urban and rural areas by setting up institutions
to high quality institutions in urban and rural areas by setting up institutions in un‐ served and underserved areas.
• Improve equity in Higher education in providing adequate opportunities of hi h
higher education to socially and educationally backward classes; women and d ti t
i ll
d d ti
ll b k
d l
d
differently abled persons. 12
Guiding Principles
Guiding Principles
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Incentivizing and dis
Incentivizing
and dis‐incentivizing
incentivizing
Apolitical decision‐making
Norm based and outcome dependent funding
Norm based and outcome dependent funding
Disclosure based governance
Autonomy and accountability
Autonomy and accountability
Equitable and inclusive development Quality and research focus
Quality and research focus
Independent third party quality assurance mechanisms
ec a s s
1312
Prerequisites
St t
States
– State Higher Education Council – State Perspective Plan – State funding commitment – share and timeliness
share and timeliness
– Filling faculty positions – Affiliation and Exam reforms
– Governance and administrative reforms
administrative reforms – Academic reforms
Institutions
Institutional governance reforms
Academic reforms
Academic reforms
Examination reforms
Project Management Teams
Equity Commitments
Commitments on research and innovation efforts
innovation efforts
– Faculty recruitment & improvement
– Regulatory compliance
R l t
li
–
–
–
–
–
–
1413
Paradigm Shift
Current system
Current system
RUSA
Non‐12B and non‐2(f) Institutions excluded
Non‐12B and non‐2(f) ()
Institutions Included
Can only fund institutions
Can fund through States to facilitate holistic planning
Ad‐hoc funding/ demand based
Norm‐based and performance based, competitive funding
Weak quality assurance mechanisms
Improvement in quality with robust monitoring and evaluation/accreditation mechanisms
l
/
d
h
15
Institutional Structure
Institutional Structure
National Level State Level
Institutional Level
• RUSA Mission Authority • Project Approval Board
• Technical Support Group
• Project Directorate (in MHRD)
• State Higher Education Council
• Project Directorate (in State Government)
• Technical Support Group
pp
p
• Board of Governors
• Project Monitoring Unit 16
Centre‐State funding will be in the ratio of :
• 90:10 for special category States (NE states, Sikkim, J&K, Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand)
• 65:35 for other States and UTs
65 35 for other States and UTs
• 50% of state share can be mobilized through private participation/PPP
Plan Period
12th Plan
Central Share
16,227Crores
State Share
6,628 Crores
Total
22,855 Crores
17
Components & Outlay (12
Components
& Outlay (12th Plan)
Sl. No.
1
2
3
Unit cost
Component
(Rs Crores)
Creation of Universities by way of upgradation of
55
existing
i ti autonomous
t
colleges
ll
Creation of Universities by conversion of colleges
55
in a cluster
grants to Universities
Infrastructure g
20
No of
Universities/
Colleges/
States/Units
45
universities
i
iti
35
universities
150
universities
i
iti
60 colleges
720
54 colleges
216
Outlay
(Rs.
Crores)
2475
1925
3000
4
5
New Model Colleges (General)
12
Upgradation of existing degree colleges to model
4
colleges
6
N
New
C ll
Colleges
(P f
(Professional
i
l & Technical)
T h i l)
26
40 colleges
ll
1040
Infrastructure grants to colleges
2
3500
colleges
7000
Research, innovation and quality improvement
60
20 States
1200
Equity initiatives
5
Faculty Recruitment Support
0.58
7
8
9
10
20
States/UTs
5000
positions
100
2900
18
Components & Outlay (12
Components
& Outlay (12th Plan)
Sl. No.
11
Unit cost
Component
(Rs Crores)
Faculty improvements
10
12
Vocationalisation of Higher Education
15
13
Leadership
Development
Administrators
14
15
16
17
Educational
Institutional restructuring & reforms
5
20
Capacity building & preparation, Data collection &
10
planning
Management Information System
19
Sub Total
4% Management,
Research
Total
20
Central Share
18
of
10
No of
Outlay
Universities/
(Rs.
Colleges/
Crores)
States/Units
20
200
St t /UT
States/UTs
20 States/UTs 300
20
States/UTs
20
States/UTs
20
States/UTs
20
States/UTs
100
400
200
200
21976
Monitoring,
Evaluation
&
879
22855
16227
19
Process Flow
Reviiew & Apprrovals
RUSA Mission Authority
MIS
St t
State Plans
MIS
Grants
RUSA Project Approval Board
Grants (Central & State share)
STATE STATE HIGHER EDUCATION COUNCIL
STATE UNIVERSITIES & COLLEGES
MIS
FFunds
ds Disbursem
ment
Institu
utional Plans
Resou
urce Utilisation
n
MIS
MIS
MIS
20
RUSA Footprint
RUSA Footprint
J&K
States/UTs under RUSA
23 + 4
HP
Punjab
States/UTs not under RUSA
2+3
2 + 3
Uttarakhand
Delhi
Sikkim
Haryana
Ar. P
States indicated their willingness under RUSA
3
Rajasthan
U.P.
Gujarat
Bihar
Manipur
M.P.
W.B
Daman & Diu
Odisha
Maharashtra
Dadar & Nagar Haveli
Telangana
&
A dh P d h
Andhra Pradesh
Goa
Lakshadweep
Meghalaya
Meghalaya Jharakhand
Karnataka
Pudducherry
TN
T.N.
Kerala
21
Fund Equalisation Formula
Fund Equalisation
Sl. No.
Criteria
Marks 1
1.
Base Funding
Base Funding
20
2.
Population 40
(18‐23)
3.
Institutional Density
10
4.
Spend on Higher Education 10
(as a % of GSDP)
5.
Need (Gross Enrolment Ratio) 10
6.
Special problems
Total
10
100
22
Fund Equalisation explained
Fund Equalisation
•
With marks being assigned across the 6 criteria, Incentive ‐Disincentive With
marks being assigned across the 6 criteria Incentive ‐Disincentive
Compatibility Framework is applied to determine allocation to states based on (1) willingness, (2) adherence to timelines and (3) submission of SHEPs SHEPs
•
Entitlement of funds would be determined as follows
Willingness
On time
SHEP Submission Incentive/
Disincentive
Entitlement
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
3 Yes
100% Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
2 Yes
66.7%
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
1 Yes
33.3%
Yes/No
Yes/No
Yes/No
0 Yes
0%
23
Funds released
Funds released
• Total funds released under RUSA Rs. 279.05 crores
• Total amount released as preparatory grants – Rs. 74.09 crores
• Total amount released for MDC
 First installment – Rs. 177.08 crores for 45 proposals (out of a target of 60 in 12th Plan)
 Second installment ‐
Second installment Rs. 20.68 crores for 23 proposals (under the norms Rs 20 68 crores for 23 proposals (under the norms
of the erstwhile MDC scheme norms)
• Total amount released as MMER – Rs. 2.24 crores
• Rs. 4.00 crores for National Quality Renaissance Initiative to strengthen the accreditation system in the States to NAAC
• Rs
R 1.00 crores for Leadership Development and Capacity 1 00
f L d hi D l
dC
i
Building to TISS
24
F d l
Funds released ‐
d States
St t
Sl. No
State
Component
Prep
MDC
Total Amount
MMER
1
Andhra Pradesh
3.25
25.55
0.28
29.09
2
Bihar
2.60
‐
0.02
2.62
3
Chattisgarh
2.60
‐
0.02
2.62
4
Goa
1.95
‐
0.01
1.96
5
Gujarat
3.25
‐
0.32
3.28
6
2 60
2.60
‐
0 02
0.02
2 62
2.62
3.60
‐
0.03
3.63
8
Haryana
H
Himachal Pradesh
J&K
3.60
‐
0.03
3.63
9
Jharkhand
1.95 ‐
0.01
1.96
10 Karnataka
3.25
‐
0.32
3.28
7
Amount in crores of Rupees
25
Funds released States
Funds released ‐
Sl. No
Components
State
Prep
MDCs
Total Amount
MMER
11
Kerala
2.60
‐
0.02
2.62
12
Maharashtra
3.25
‐
0.03
3.28
13
Odisha
2.60
31.20
0.33
34.13
14
Punjab
2.60
14.68
0.02
17.31
15
Uttar Pradesh
3.25
101.40 1.04
105.69
16
Uttarakhand
3.60
‐
0.03
3.63
17
West Bengal
2.60
‐
0.02
2.62
Amount in crores of Rupees
26
F d l
Funds released ‐
d States
St t
Sl
No
State
18
Arunachal Pradesh 2.70
19
Assam
20
Components
Prep
MDCs
MMER
Total Amount
‐
0.02
2.72
3.60
6.00
0.06
9.63
Manipur
2.70
‐
0.02
2.72
21
Mizoram
2.70
‐
0.02
2.72
22
Nagaland
2.70
‐
0.02
2.72
23
Tripura
2.70
15.02
0.02
17.74
A
Amount
t in crores of Rupees
i
fR
27
Funds released –
d l
d UTs
Sl. No
U.T
Component
p
Prep
MDC
Total Amount
MMER
1
A&N Islands
1.95
3.90
#
5.85
2
Chandigarh
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
Daman & Diu
Daman & Diu
1.95
‐
#
1.95
1.95
‐
#
1.95
1 95
1.95
‐
#
1 95
1.95
3
4
# Under process – to be released shortly
28
PAB Approvals (13th May)
J&K
•
36.6 cr for creation of 02 universities by conversion of
colleges in a cluster.
cluster
•
20 cr for infrastructure grants to 02 Universities.
•
6cr for upgrading 03 degree colleges to model degree
colleges.
•
26 cr for 02 new professional colleges.
•
21 77 cr for
21.77
f infrastructure
i f t t
grants
t to
t 22 colleges.
ll
•
3.735 cr for vocationalization of higher education to 20
colleges
Punjab
P
j b
•
20 cr for infrastructure grants to 02 universities.
•
26 cr for 02 new professional colleges.
•
12 cr for new 02 model degree colleges.
•
8 cr for upgrading existing 04 degree colleges to model
degree colleges.
colleges
•
38 cr for infrastructure grants to 38 colleges.
•
2.35 cr for equity initiatives.
•
4.94 cr for vocationalisation of hgher education. In 13
colleges
Gujarat
•
50 cr for infrastructure grants to 05 universities.
•
26 cr for 02 new professional colleges.
•
35 cr for infrastructure grants to 35 colleges.
•
1 66 cr for equity initiatives
1.66
initiatives.
•
3.33 cr for faculty improvement.
•
5 cr for vocationalisation of higher education
Himachal Pradesh
•
18.3 cr for creation of Universities by conversion of
colleges in a cluster.
•
10 cr for Infrastructure Grants to Universities.
•
12 cr for new Model Colleges (General).
•
2 cr for upgrading Degree colleges to Model Degree
colleges.
professional colleges.
g
•
13 cr for new p
•
25 cr for infrastructure grants to colleges.
•
2.34 cr for equity initiatives.
Nagaland
•
•
•
•
•
6 cr for 01 new model colleges
15 cr for infrastructure grants to 15 colleges.
9 04 cr for faculty recruitment support
9.04
5 cr for vocationalisation of Higher Education. In 15
colleges
Total fund is 35.04 cr and Central share is 31.536 cr.
Manipur
•
•
•
•
•
•
25 cr for creation of 01 university by conversion of
colleges in a cluster.
13 cr for 01 new professional college
20 cr for infrastructure grants to 20 colleges.
0.8 cr for vocationalisation of higher education. In 40
colleges
29
Total fund is 58.8 cr and Central share is 52.92 cr.
State Higher Education Plans
State Higher Education Plans
• TTen
St t
States
h
have
submitted their State
Higher Education Plans
(SHEP )
(SHEPs).
• SHEPs of six States were
pp
and p
placed for
appraised
PAB’s approval; four
SHEPs are works in
progress
p
g
with
final
versions likely to be
submitted shortly
• Remaining states also
likely to submit first cut of
their SHEPs soon
J&K
H.P
PB
UK
HR
UP
U.P
NG
MN
GJ
Telangana*
&
A.P
SHEP Appraised
SHEP Appraised
SHEP Received
SHEP to be received
30
State Higher Education Councils
•
•
•
Prior to launch of RUSA –
P
i t l
h f RUSA
08 SHECs in existence [Kerala, Karnataka, A.P, W.B, U.P, T.N, Maharashtra & Gujarat (called
& Gujarat (called Knowledge Consortia]
After the launch of RUSA –
15 new SHECs have been set up
set up [Assam, Bihar, [Assam Bihar
Chattishgarh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, J&K, Manipur, Odisha, Punjab, Nagaland Manipur
Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram, Tripura, Uttarkhand and A&N Islands]
Total of 23 SHECs in the
Total of 23 SHECs in the country Nagaland
Tripura
Mizoramd
Lakshwadeep
31
31
Expectation from States
Expectation from States
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Formation of SHECs – as per RUSA norms
Transfer of central share and state share to SHECs
Transfer of central share and state share to SHECs
Formation of State Project Directorates
Submission of SHEPs
Submission of SHEPs Adherence to timelines for fulfilling RUSA prerequisites Timely utilisation of funds and submission of UCs
Timely utilisation
of funds and submission of UCs
Monitoring of projects for which funds have been released
32
Thank you
Thank you
33